[OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan at opensips.org
Thu Aug 30 14:50:22 CEST 2012


Hi,

OpenSIPS all the time adds is Route as a loose route, so for its own 
Route, when doing loose_route() will act as loose router all the time. 
Nevertheless, when checking the next hop, OpenSIPS can handle both a 
strict or loose router (as next hop).

But once again, opensips itself does only loose routing for its Routes.

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com


On 08/28/2012 05:48 PM, Binan AL Halabi wrote:
> Hi Bogdan,
>
> i see in the opensips Docs the definition of loose_route() function:
>
> " The function performs routing of SIP requests which contain a route 
> set. The name is a little bit confusing, as *this function also routes 
> requests which are in the “strict router” format. "*
>
> so Does this function do the strict routing also ? according to which 
> chapter in RFC this routing belong ?
>
> regards
>
> --- On *Tue, 8/28/12, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu /<bogdan at opensips.org>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
>     Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]
>     To: "OpenSIPS users mailling list" <users at lists.opensips.org>
>     Cc: "Binan AL Halabi" <binanalhalabi at yahoo.com>
>     Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 7:29 AM
>
>     Hi,
>
>     That is not true - OpenSIPS acts all the time as a loose router.
>     The param you mentioned simply changes on how the "loose router"
>     label should be advertised : (1) "lr" or (2) "lr=on" - but both do
>     mean a loose router.
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>     http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
>
>     On 08/28/2012 03:46 PM, Binan AL Halabi wrote:
>>     Hi ,
>>     the statment *modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1)*  in the script
>>     lets opensips uses lr=on instead of just ;lr to work as loose
>>     router, so it behaves as strict router where it should be loose
>>     router   in fail case, since it detects only ;lr in messages.
>>
>>
>>     --- On *Mon, 8/27/12, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu /<bogdan at opensips.org>
>>     </mc/compose?to=bogdan at opensips.org>/* wrote:
>>
>>
>>         From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
>>         </mc/compose?to=bogdan at opensips.org>
>>         Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with
>>         Record-Route]
>>         To: mickael at winlux.fr </mc/compose?to=mickael at winlux.fr>
>>         Cc: "OpenSIPS users mailling list" <users at lists.opensips.org>
>>         </mc/compose?to=users at lists.opensips.org>
>>         Date: Monday, August 27, 2012, 8:48 AM
>>
>>         As the next destination should be 6.6.6.6, some stupid questions:
>>
>>         1) is 6.6.6.6 configured in domain module or as "alias" ?
>>
>>         2) have you check to loopback interface ? maybe the ACK is
>>         spiraling
>>         over there.
>>
>>         Also, try to reproduce the ACK case, but enable full debug in
>>         script for
>>         the loose_route() function:
>>              if (is_method=="ACK") setdebug(6);
>>
>>         And post the output of opensips - this will give some clue on
>>         what it is
>>         doing.
>>
>>         Regards,
>>
>>         Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>
>>
>>         On 08/27/2012 06:41 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>>         > 7.7.7.7 and 8.8.8.8 are both from the same instance of
>>         opensips (same
>>         > server 2 IPs interfaces).
>>         >
>>         > in opensips log, no error, just no forwarding to customer IPBX.
>>         > but tomorrow I'll test with other debug option.
>>         >
>>         > Thanks
>>         >
>>         >> The 7.7.7.7 and 8.8.8.8 IPs are both from the same
>>         instance of opensips
>>         >> (doing interface exchange) or there are 2 different SIP
>>         entities ?
>>         >>
>>         >> Also, do you see any errors in the logs when the ACK is
>>         handled ?
>>         >>
>>         >> regards,
>>         >>
>>         >> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         >> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         >> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>         >>
>>         >>
>>         >> On 08/27/2012 05:58 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>>         >>> Hi
>>         >>> in attachement call flow and ACK from provider (this ACK
>>         is not resend
>>         >>> by
>>         >>> opensips to customer IPBX).
>>         >>>
>>         >>> Thanks
>>         >>>
>>         >>>> Hi,
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Please post the ACK message your opensips proxy gets,
>>         and also the
>>         >>>> outbound ACK request (leaving your opensips) - Include
>>         also the net
>>         >>>> layer info (like src ip and port) - feel free to
>>         masquerade the IPs,
>>         >>>> but
>>         >>>> do it consistently,
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Regards,
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         >>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         >>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> On 08/27/2012 09:17 AM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>>         >>>>> Hi,
>>         >>>>> do you think this may be the cause of my routing ACK
>>         problem ?
>>         >>>>>
>>         >>>>>> Hi,
>>         >>>>>> loose route parameter lr , which can be present in sip
>>         or sips
>>         >>>>>> Record-Route and Route URIs to indicate that the proxy
>>         server
>>         >>>>>> identified
>>         >>>>>> by the URI supports loose routing.
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> RFC 3261 explains the "lr" parameter as just ";lr",
>>         not lr=on. This
>>         >>>>>> brokes
>>         >>>>>> some UAs which add =on to the "lr".  opensips adds=on 
>>         to be
>>         >>>>>> compatible
>>         >>>>>> with these UAs
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> //Binan.
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> --- On Fri, 8/24/12,
>>         mickael at winlux.fr<mickael at winlux.fr>    wrote:
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> From: mickael at winlux.fr<mickael at winlux.fr>
>>         >>>>>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re:  Routing problem with
>>         >>>>>> Record-Route]
>>         >>>>>> To: "OpenSIPS users mailling
>>         list"<users at lists.opensips.org>
>>         >>>>>> Date: Friday, August 24, 2012, 5:08 AM
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> Exactly Opensips add lr=on and callee device transform
>>         it into
>>         >>>>>> lr;r2=on.
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> my other devices (asterisk, avaya, etc ...) do not
>>         transform lr...
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> My Opensips version is version: opensips 1.6.4-2-tls
>>         (i386/freebsd)
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> what is the difference between lr=on and lr;r2=on ?
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>> So OpenSIPS adds "lr=on" but the callee device
>>         transform it into a
>>         >>>>>>> "lr".....
>>         >>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>> What version of opensips are you
>>         >>>>>>     using?
>>         >>>>>>> Regards,
>>         >>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         >>>>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         >>>>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>         >>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>> On 08/24/2012 02:27 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>>         >>>>>>>> Hi Bogdan-Andrei,
>>         >>>>>>>> Thank you for your response.
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>> Yes I confirm in INVITE I have 2 RR with lr=on:
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.8;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.9;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>> and in 200OK I have 1 RR with just lr:
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>,<sip:8.8.8.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>> and in ACK I have 2 Route with lr:
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>> Hi Mickael,
>>         >>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>> Can you confirm (for the failed call) that OpenSIPS
>>         added in
>>         >>>>>>>>> INVITE
>>         >>>>>>>>> RR
>>         >>>>>>>>> hdrs with "lr=on" param and in the 200 OK or ACK
>>         you get only "lr"
>>         >>>>>>>>> param
>>         >>>>>>>>> (with no value) ?
>>         >>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>         >>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         >>>>>>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         >>>>>>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>         >>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>> On 08/24/2012 11:09 AM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Hi list,
>>         >>>>>>>>>> I have a routing problem with my Opensips
>>         >>>>>>>>>> version: opensips 1.6.4-2-tls (i386/freebsd)
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Indeed Opensips is unable to route ACK packet to final
>>         >>>>>>>>>> destination
>>         >>>>>>>>>> (look
>>         >>>>>>>>>> attachement .txt).
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> The only difference with a normal call (Call OK), it's
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route
>>         >>>>>>>>>> formating. Customer's device send 200OK with
>>         differents fields:
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Test device with the problem (call NOT OK):
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Ex: problem call = 1 field for 2 routes
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Extract from the customer
>>         >>>>>>     200OK
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>,<sip:9.9.9.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Test with another device (call OK)
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Ex: normal call = 2 fields for 2 routes
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Extract from the Customer 200OK
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:8.8.8.8;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         <sip:9.9.9.9;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> My question is: This opensips version is able to
>>         work with 1
>>         >>>>>>>>>> record-route
>>         >>>>>>>>>> field containing 2
>>         >>>>>>     informations ?
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> regards
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>>>>>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>>>>>>>
>>         http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>>>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>>>> Users mailing
>>         >>>>>>     list
>>         >>>>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>>>
>>         >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>>
>>         >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>>
>>         >>>> _______________________________________________
>>         >>>> Users mailing list
>>         >>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>>>
>>         >> _______________________________________________
>>         >> Users mailing list
>>         >> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         >> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>         >>
>>         >
>>         >
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Users mailing list
>>         Users at lists.opensips.org
>>         http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Users mailing list
>>     Users at lists.opensips.org  </mc/compose?to=Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120830/d1e12352/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Users mailing list